Rupert Murdoch: From Bad to Worse?

MPC Paul Stephenson (L) & AC John Yates resigned over the scandal
By Frederick E. Allen - Forbes 

Here is how British journalists watching Rupert Murdoch's testimony before Parliament are reacting today. Granted, they work for competitors that might be happy to see News Corp and its newspapers suffer, but they know the story of the ever-widening News Corp scandals better than anyone.
Dan Sabbagh, at The Guardian:
The great old man of newspapers looked hopelessly out of touch in the early stages of the father-and-son grilling in front of MPs today. There were the marathon pauses; the one-word answers; the look, again and again of mystification. He tried, several times, to defer to [his son] James, who clearly had plenty of answers at his fingertips. His hand beat the desk several times to emphasise the occasional long answer. But above all, Rupert Murdoch knew nothing about phone hacking – and he didn't look like he was acting either.
  Tony Harnden, of The Telegraph:
He gives the impression of knowing nothing and having decided to just wing it – repeatedly saying he has never heard of key characters and issues involved in the phone hacking scandal. . . . One minute monosyllabic, the next minute sarcastic and dismissive, banging the table and cantankerous throughout – it’s hard to imagine an approach that could elicit less sympathy. . . .
It’s extremely difficult to takeRupert Murdoch’sappearance at face value. The man whois legendarily hands on and runs a global empire that, he said, employs 53,000 people (of which the News of the World represented one percent, he pointed out) is surely not a senile old dodderer who was blissfully aware that dark arts being practiced by his journalists.

 Andrew Sullivan:
Murdoch refuses to take any responsibility for the affair. Again: staggering. The notion of the buck stopping at the top seems completely alien to him. The total lack of interest in correcting wrongs, the blithe assurance that he has no ultimate responsibility - the NOTW [News of the World] representing a mere 1 percent of his company. . . .
Even though this corporation had evidence itself of criminality, no one knew of it; and when the police investigated, the review was a couple of hours. The whole thing stinks to heaven.

And as for the board of Murdoch's company, Andrew Ross Sorkin, inThe New York Times, quotes Nell Minow, a member of the board of GovernanceMetrics International and founder of the Corporate Library, a governance consultancy, as saying, "This is a board that qualifies for an ‘F’ in every category. It is the ultimate crony board.”
As Andrew Sullivan puts it, "It looks bleaker and bleaker for News Corp to me."
And this just in, according to Sullivan: Someone has tried to physically attack Murdoch at the hearings and has been taken away in handcuffs.
Addendum: A friend points out that Andy Borowitz has given this explanation for Murdoch's ignorance of his company's activities:
Now, I’m sure many of you are wondering, how could I, Rupert Murdoch, one of the most powerful men in the world, have no idea what is going on?  The answer, my friends, is simple: I get all of my information from my own newspapers.  If you relied on News of the World, The Sun, and The New York Post for your information, I can assure you that you wouldn't have a clue what was going on, either.